Board Won't Appeal Cell Tower Ruling

JAMES CITY — There will be no challenge to a court decision this month that paved the way for the construction of two 120-foot cell phone towers on a Kingsmill golf course.

The James City County Board of Zoning Appeals, which a year ago overturned several decisions that approved the towers, decided last week not to file an appeal of the decision handed down Dec. 7 by Gloucester Circuit Court Judge R. Bruce Long.

The appeals board met in closed session Dec. 16 with its attorneys - from the Newport News law firm of Patten, Wornom, Hatten and Diamonstein - who represented the board pro bono after its decision was challenged in court by Verizon Wireless, AT&T and James City County.

During that meeting, members of the appeals board voted unanimously not to appeal Long's ruling, according to a statement released Friday by Christy H. Parrish, the county's proffer administrator, on behalf of Zoning Administrator Melissa Brown, who serves as the clerk to the board.

"The (Long's) eight page opinion ... largely vindicated the process followed by the Board of Zoning Appeals in its December 18, 2008 hearing of the matter," the statement reads. "The judge found, however, that the County which pursued the appeal along with wireless carriers Verizon and AT&T, had proved by a preponderance of the evidence that the towers complied with the County's camouflage tower ordinance."

Mark J. Wenger, the appeals board chairman, said an appeal, which would have to be filed with the state Supreme Court, was not in the best interest of the county.

"The board is satisfied that the Judge properly rejected the legal attacks on our decision making process," Wenger said in the statement.

"While a majority of board members disagree with the Judge's decision, they nevertheless feel it is in the best interest of the citizens to put this matter to rest," he said.

Meanwhile, the county is pushing for state legislation that would keep zoning appeals boards out of court in such situations.

Part of its legislative agenda for the upcoming year supports a measure that would clarify that such boards are not parties to appeals resulting from their decisions.

TOWERS TIMELINE

Early 2008: Towers approved by city planning director, followed by Development Review Committee and then Planning Commission